If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Charleston Post and Courier)   Old and busted: Marriage Equality. New hotness: Divorce Equality   (postandcourier.com) divider line 72
    More: Obvious, same-sex couples, same-sex marriages, property settlement, Texas Supreme Court  
•       •       •

7550 clicks; posted to Main » on 01 Dec 2013 at 7:43 PM (19 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



72 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-12-01 07:47:48 PM
Reading the headline I thought "For men?"

Turns out I was half right.
 
2013-12-01 07:49:24 PM
"It's humiliating to know that you spend that money, that time to be in a committed relationship and for it to end. I mean, that hurts. But then to be in a state that doesn't recognize you as a human being, or recognize you for who you are, for who you love, it's hard," Czekala-Chatham said during an interview at her current home in Hernando. "I'm not treated like the neighbors next door. I'm treated like a second-class citizen."

I hope she wins, but why the hell would you move from California to Mississippi, a straight-marriage-only state? This wasn't a big secret at the time, was it?
 
2013-12-01 07:49:59 PM
A few years ago, before the ball started rolling on this, I suggested that the sanctity of divorce be preserved.

Of course the lawyers are all for this.
 
2013-12-01 07:50:23 PM
If you think gay marriage is wrong then you should allow gay divorce on principle as it enables what you want.  Otherwise you're pretty much just saying "gay marriage is icky and we want to stick it to them."
 
2013-12-01 07:52:11 PM
But without a man being part of the divorce, how will they know which one to screw over?
 
2013-12-01 07:52:53 PM
Divorce equality? I guess it could work if neither side declares themselves to be "the man" in the relationship leaving nobody to be screwed over.
 
2013-12-01 07:53:54 PM

HawkEyes: If you think gay marriage is wrong then you should allow gay divorce on principle as it enables what you want.  Otherwise you're pretty much just saying "gay marriage is icky and we want to stick it to them."


Perhaps- but granting a divorce potentially acknowledges that it was a marriage in the first place- not something they (uber conservative Miss'sippy) care to do.
 
2013-12-01 07:55:00 PM

HawkEyes: If you think gay marriage is wrong then you should allow gay divorce on principle as it enables what you want.  Otherwise you're pretty much just saying "gay marriage is icky and we want to stick it to them."


Well...

(disclaimer first: Im pro marriage equality, or rather, I dont care who you marry as long as it makes you happy)

1/ To get the court to recognize the divorce, they first have to recognise the marriage
2/ They have no obvious laws stating people cannot be divorced (I guess the pro-marriage group didnt think this part through/
3/ This could be a really clever way to force the law through

// Divorce is not something I would wish on ANYONE
/ hope each is happy in the future and it is not to dirty
// It is gonna get dirty
 
2013-12-01 07:56:03 PM

HawkEyes: If you think gay marriage is wrong then you should allow gay divorce on principle as it enables what you want.  Otherwise you're pretty much just saying "gay marriage is icky and we want to stick it to them."


"Wanting to stick it to them" is the primary motivation for opposing same-sex marriage.
 
2013-12-01 07:57:45 PM

HawkEyes: If you think gay marriage is wrong then you should allow gay divorce on principle as it enables what you want.  Otherwise you're pretty much just saying "gay marriage is icky and we want to stick it to them."


In all seriousness, they're going to object to anything that recognizes gay people exist.
 
2013-12-01 07:58:12 PM

Dimensio: HawkEyes: If you think gay marriage is wrong then you should allow gay divorce on principle as it enables what you want.  Otherwise you're pretty much just saying "gay marriage is icky and we want to stick it to them."

"Wanting to stick it to them" is the primary motivation for opposing same-sex marriage.


Isnt one of the points of marriage "I promise to stick it to just this ONE person" ?
 
2013-12-01 07:59:22 PM

oukewldave: But without a man being part of the divorce, how will they know which one to screw over?


Weight lifting contest? Testosterone measurements? Start requiring gay marriage licenses to register if you're the power top, or butch?
 
2013-12-01 07:59:30 PM

beany: "It's humiliating to know that you spend that money, that time to be in a committed relationship and for it to end. I mean, that hurts. But then to be in a state that doesn't recognize you as a human being, or recognize you for who you are, for who you love, it's hard," Czekala-Chatham said during an interview at her current home in Hernando. "I'm not treated like the neighbors next door. I'm treated like a second-class citizen."

I hope she wins, but why the hell would you move from California to Mississippi, a straight-marriage-only state? This wasn't a big secret at the time, was it?


It may have been on page fifteen of the EULA. Who reads that far?

Click-click-click. "Yeah, okay, whatever, let me into the damned state!"
 
2013-12-01 07:59:55 PM

oukewldave: But without a man being part of the divorce, how will they know which one to screw over?


FTA :

Czekala-Chatham asked for alimony, among other things, but those matters have been settled. He said Melancon will get the house, and won't have to pay alimony.

Neither one, apparently.
 
2013-12-01 08:00:11 PM
Who didn't see this coming, raise your hand.............now ask yourself "how could you not?"
 
2013-12-01 08:01:07 PM
Why does she need to get divorced if they don't recognize the marriage? Just stay out of California.
 
2013-12-01 08:01:15 PM

oukewldave: But without a man being part of the divorce, how will they know which one to screw over?


This is why the lawyers will oppose it. As soon as it's determined these marriages should end with 50/50 split or a "what you bring in is what you take out", the lawyers are farked.

Men everywhere should be cheering the shiat out of this.
 
2013-12-01 08:01:54 PM
I'd like to propose a guideline for same-sex divorce:

One of the people has to take the role of "the sucker", and lose all their stuff, lose their house, lose their money, lose all their investments, get their wages garnished, and have to financially support the one taking the role of "the biatch" for the rest of the biatch's life.

If we're for equality, let's really be for equality.
 
2013-12-01 08:02:56 PM

beany: "It's humiliating to know that you spend that money, that time to be in a committed relationship and for it to end. I mean, that hurts. But then to be in a state that doesn't recognize you as a human being, or recognize you for who you are, for who you love, it's hard," Czekala-Chatham said during an interview at her current home in Hernando. "I'm not treated like the neighbors next door. I'm treated like a second-class citizen."

I hope she wins, but why the hell would you move from California to Mississippi, a straight-marriage-only state? This wasn't a big secret at the time, was it?


She didn't. FTFA:

She and Dana Ann Melancon traveled from Mississippi to San Francisco to get married in 2008.
 
2013-12-01 08:05:09 PM

oukewldave: ...how will they know which one to screw over?


hasty ambush: ... nobody to be screwed over.


42 seconds......
 
2013-12-01 08:07:01 PM

jaylectricity: Why does she need to get divorced if they don't recognize the marriage? Just stay out of California.


That brought up an interesting line of thought for me.

So, what does happen is a gay couple gets married and one moves to a state that doesn't recognize it and the other stays in state. Does that effectively lock the person in the first state into a marriage with no way to get out of it since the other now resides in a state that doesn't recognize is? Seems like it would be a really good 'fark you' to someone.
 
2013-12-01 08:07:03 PM
The only real solution is to abolish governmental involvement in marriage (licensees) altogether. The original reason they started this was to prevent interracial marriage, and now it's moved into a new (well, not really) form of discrimination. What business is it of the government's who you marry?
 
2013-12-01 08:10:27 PM

TomD9938: oukewldave: But without a man being part of the divorce, how will they know which one to screw over?

FTA :

Czekala-Chatham asked for alimony, among other things, but those matters have been settled. He said Melancon will get the house, and won't have to pay alimony.

Neither one, apparently.


This really shows women are immune in a divorce case. Teflon.

You watch, if two gay men were to do the same thing the judge would pick a random woman out from the balcony and give her their house and make both of them pay her half their free salary every month...
 
2013-12-01 08:11:33 PM

dj_bigbird: The only real solution is to abolish governmental involvement in marriage (licensees) altogether. The original reason they started this was to prevent interracial marriage, and now it's moved into a new (well, not really) form of discrimination. What business is it of the government's who you marry?


So, how would you tackle the other legal issues of marriage, i.e. taxes, privilage, right of attorney?
 
2013-12-01 08:25:07 PM

LoneWolf343: dj_bigbird: The only real solution is to abolish governmental involvement in marriage (licensees) altogether. The original reason they started this was to prevent interracial marriage, and now it's moved into a new (well, not really) form of discrimination. What business is it of the government's who you marry?

So, how would you tackle the other legal issues of marriage, i.e. taxes, privilage, right of attorney?


Taxes: Tax them as 2 individuals (this presumes that there should be an income tax at all, but nevermind)

Privilege/power of attorney/etc: Part of the "contract" that the parties sign as part of getting "married." It'd be a boilerplate contract that has all of the stuff included in it like this, and would include how to handle a "divorce"
 
2013-12-01 08:31:25 PM
So, gimme a hand here...
The one chick has two kids from a first straight marriage. I'm going to assume (yeah, I know) that she was probably getting child support and alimony from the dissolution of this first marriage (unless she's a widow).

Upon her re-marrying, does the old alimony go away, replaced with alimony (or whatever agreement they come to) from the second marriage, and the child support stay? Or she double-dip on the alimony from both marriages?
 
2013-12-01 08:31:43 PM
That oath meant something to me.  It's why I stick by in bad times.

Fark oath-breakers.

/Yes, I allow exceptions.
 
2013-12-01 08:37:45 PM

jaylectricity: Why does she need to get divorced if they don't recognize the marriage? Just stay out of California.


wow that takes a special level of ignorance.

(bonus troll points for spelling mistake)
 
2013-12-01 08:40:41 PM

fusillade762: beany: "It's humiliating to know that you spend that money, that time to be in a committed relationship and for it to end. I mean, that hurts. But then to be in a state that doesn't recognize you as a human being, or recognize you for who you are, for who you love, it's hard," Czekala-Chatham said during an interview at her current home in Hernando. "I'm not treated like the neighbors next door. I'm treated like a second-class citizen."

I hope she wins, but why the hell would you move from California to Mississippi, a straight-marriage-only state? This wasn't a big secret at the time, was it?

She didn't. FTFA:

She and Dana Ann Melancon traveled from Mississippi to San Francisco to get married in 2008.


Then they should make the trek again.
 
2013-12-01 08:41:01 PM

HawkEyes: If you think gay marriage is wrong then you should allow gay divorce on principle as it enables what you want.  Otherwise you're pretty much just saying "gay marriage is icky and we want to stick it to them."


You cannot divorce someone who isn't married. If they do not recognize the marriage, how can the state dissolve it?

Umfufu: So, gimme a hand here...
The one chick has two kids from a first straight marriage. I'm going to assume (yeah, I know) that she was probably getting child support and alimony from the dissolution of this first marriage (unless she's a widow).

Upon her re-marrying, does the old alimony go away, replaced with alimony (or whatever agreement they come to) from the second marriage, and the child support stay? Or she double-dip on the alimony from both marriages?


TTBOMK, once you remarry you no longer get alimony from the prior spouse.

/unmarried
 
2013-12-01 08:50:45 PM
You pissed and moaned in order to get married. Now you can just stay that way.
 
2013-12-01 08:55:57 PM
This is a serious legal quandary for same-sex couples who were married in jurisdictions that recognize same-sex marriage, but live in states that do not.  There is the obvious solution (marriage equality across the board), but that will be many years down the road for that to happen.  There is no answer to help those in this situation.
 
2013-12-01 09:22:35 PM
These lesbians just learned that you don't need a man to get hosed.
 
2013-12-01 09:23:31 PM

dj_bigbird: The only real solution is to abolish governmental involvement in marriage (licensees) altogether. The original reason they started this was to prevent interracial marriage, and now it's moved into a new (well, not really) form of discrimination. What business is it of the government's who you marry?


I agree but so many of our laws, our tax code and government benefits are set up to pander to the stupid/people who marry-Which is the real reason (not love) that gays are so big on this marriage thing.

Ideally our laws should be as marriage neutral as possible.  But undoing this will be long process that I suspect lacks support through the entire political spectrum.
 
2013-12-01 09:24:14 PM
Interesting conundrum.

New York State does not recognize my firearm license. Is there an equivalent end-run around their state laws which would force the to "recognize me as a human being" similar to how other states denying a couple of loving, committed people a marriage license are failing to "recognize them as human beings"
 
2013-12-01 09:28:44 PM

Slartibartfaster: jaylectricity: Why does she need to get divorced if they don't recognize the marriage? Just stay out of California.

wow that takes a special level of ignorance.

(bonus troll points for spelling mistake)


What word was misspelled?  That sentence looks ok to me.
 
2013-12-01 09:40:22 PM

lewismarktwo: Reading the headline I thought "For men?"


Divorce equality for men?? I'm drinking over here, you want to buy me a new keyboard?
 
2013-12-01 09:42:53 PM

beany: "It's humiliating to know that you spend that money, that time to be in a committed relationship and for it to end. I mean, that hurts. But then to be in a state that doesn't recognize you as a human being, or recognize you for who you are, for who you love, it's hard," Czekala-Chatham said during an interview at her current home in Hernando. "I'm not treated like the neighbors next door. I'm treated like a second-class citizen."

I hope she wins, but why the hell would you move from California to Mississippi, a straight-marriage-only state? This wasn't a big secret at the time, was it?


Could be the same reason I moved from SC to the most anti-gun state in the US: for a job.
 
2013-12-01 09:47:16 PM

fusillade762: beany:

I hope she wins, but why the hell would you move from California to Mississippi, a straight-marriage-only state? This wasn't a big secret at the time, was it?

She didn't. FTFA:

She and Dana Ann Melancon traveled from Mississippi to San Francisco to get married in 2008.


Thanks; I missed that entirely. But it also means she has even less excuse to be ignorant of Mississippi's attitude to gay marriage.

As for the divorce-in-California option, I'm looking at residency rules for California divorces here: http://www.divorcesource.com/ds/california/residency-requirements-for - a-california-divorce-811.shtml , I read that:

A judgment of dissolution of marriage may not be entered unless one of the parties to the marriage has been a resident of this state for six months and of the county in which the proceeding is filed for three months next preceding the filing of the petition.

... which sounds harsh. Do they have to establish similar residency to get married in the first place?
 
2013-12-01 09:53:51 PM

beany: A judgment of dissolution of marriage may not be entered unless one of the parties to the marriage has been a resident of this state for six months and of the county in which the proceeding is filed for three months next preceding the filing of the petition.

... which sounds harsh. Do they have to establish similar residency to get married in the first place?


I was wondering about that, too. Sounds like they (intentionally or otherwise) made it easier to get married than to get divorced.
 
2013-12-01 09:56:20 PM

HAMMERTOE: Interesting conundrum.

New York State does not recognize my firearm license. Is there an equivalent end-run around their state laws which would force the to "recognize me as a human being" similar to how other states denying a couple of loving, committed people a marriage license are failing to "recognize them as human beings"


As long as you only use the gun to shoot straight people.
 
2013-12-01 09:56:46 PM

beany: "It's humiliating to know that you spend that money, that time to be in a committed relationship and for it to end. I mean, that hurts. But then to be in a state that doesn't recognize you as a human being, or recognize you for who you are, for who you love, it's hard," Czekala-Chatham said during an interview at her current home in Hernando. "I'm not treated like the neighbors next door. I'm treated like a second-class citizen."

I hope she wins, but why the hell would you move from California to Mississippi, a straight-marriage-only state? This wasn't a big secret at the time, was it?


It would be hard to make money from a lawsuit if you got your divorce in California.
 
2013-12-01 09:58:04 PM
Oh, in case anyone was wondering, I am not that other poster, I'm simply puzzled as to the misspelled word.
I don't want to get in the middle of any alt bs.
 
2013-12-01 10:01:09 PM

Umfufu: So, gimme a hand here...
The one chick has two kids from a first straight marriage. I'm going to assume (yeah, I know) that she was probably getting child support and alimony from the dissolution of this first marriage (unless she's a widow).

Upon her re-marrying, does the old alimony go away, replaced with alimony (or whatever agreement they come to) from the second marriage, and the child support stay? Or she double-dip on the alimony from both marriages?


The husband from the first marriage has a party because the alimony stops.  The child support continues unless the second spouse adopted the children.
 
2013-12-01 10:04:40 PM

sprgrss: This is a serious legal quandary for same-sex couples who were married in jurisdictions that recognize same-sex marriage, but live in states that do not.  There is the obvious solution (marriage equality across the board), but that will be many years down the road for that to happen.  There is no answer to help those in this situation.


Obvious solution is to live in a state that supports gay marriage, or the one who wants the divorce more can set up a residence in such a state, then file there.
 
2013-12-01 10:51:20 PM

m053486: That oath meant something to me.  It's why I stick by in bad times.

Fark oath-breakers.

/Yes, I allow exceptions.


0/10
 
2013-12-01 11:01:56 PM

ArcadianRefugee: HawkEyes: If you think gay marriage is wrong then you should allow gay divorce on principle as it enables what you want.  Otherwise you're pretty much just saying "gay marriage is icky and we want to stick it to them."

You cannot divorce someone who isn't married. If they do not recognize the marriage, how can the state dissolve it?

Umfufu: So, gimme a hand here...
The one chick has two kids from a first straight marriage. I'm going to assume (yeah, I know) that she was probably getting child support and alimony from the dissolution of this first marriage (unless she's a widow).

Upon her re-marrying, does the old alimony go away, replaced with alimony (or whatever agreement they come to) from the second marriage, and the child support stay? Or she double-dip on the alimony from both marriages?

TTBOMK, once you remarry you no longer get alimony from the prior spouse.

/unmarried


That's correct (at least for indefinite alimony), but it does raise an interesting question of how states that don't recognize same-sex marriage handle that provision.  Does the state cut off alimony if a resident goes out-of-state and gets a marriage the state doesn't recognize?  I'll have to look into that.  All that assumes she's actually getting alimony at all, though.  Child support, sure, if she's the custodial parent, but alimony is only judicially ordered in about 7% of cases, so there's no guarantee of that.
 
2013-12-01 11:10:35 PM

Last Man on Earth: ArcadianRefugee: HawkEyes: If you think gay marriage is wrong then you should allow gay divorce on principle as it enables what you want.  Otherwise you're pretty much just saying "gay marriage is icky and we want to stick it to them."

You cannot divorce someone who isn't married. If they do not recognize the marriage, how can the state dissolve it?

Umfufu: So, gimme a hand here...
The one chick has two kids from a first straight marriage. I'm going to assume (yeah, I know) that she was probably getting child support and alimony from the dissolution of this first marriage (unless she's a widow).

Upon her re-marrying, does the old alimony go away, replaced with alimony (or whatever agreement they come to) from the second marriage, and the child support stay? Or she double-dip on the alimony from both marriages?

TTBOMK, once you remarry you no longer get alimony from the prior spouse.

/unmarried

That's correct (at least for indefinite alimony), but it does raise an interesting question of how states that don't recognize same-sex marriage handle that provision.  Does the state cut off alimony if a resident goes out-of-state and gets a marriage the state doesn't recognize?  I'll have to look into that.  All that assumes she's actually getting alimony at all, though.  Child support, sure, if she's the custodial parent, but alimony is only judicially ordered in about 7% of cases, so there's no guarantee of that.


I would assume the alimony thing is independent of the fact of actual marriage. Marriage may be the reason for the court decision to force regular payments, but the reason wouldn't automatically annul the alimony simply because the new state disagrees with it. It might be cause for dismissal of the other court's decision, but relocation wouldn't be a de facto reversal.
 
2013-12-01 11:21:43 PM

beany: "It's humiliating to know that you spend that money, that time to be in a committed relationship and for it to end. I mean, that hurts. But then to be in a state that doesn't recognize you as a human being, or recognize you for who you are, for who you love, it's hard," Czekala-Chatham said during an interview at her current home in Hernando. "I'm not treated like the neighbors next door. I'm treated like a second-class citizen."

I hope she wins, but why the hell would you move from California to Mississippi, a straight-marriage-only state? This wasn't a big secret at the time, was it?


They appear to be from Mississippi and only went to California to get married.
 
2013-12-01 11:33:33 PM
Interesting conundrum.

New York State does not recognize my firearm license. Is there an equivalent end-run around their state laws which would force the to "recognize me as a human being" similar to how other states denying a couple of loving, committed people a marriage license are failing to "recognize them as human beings


WTF do you live? I live in Kommifornia and they do not require a "firearms License;" you must live in a real Libtard state if you need a license for a gun!
 
Displayed 50 of 72 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report